There’s been a resolution for a super-messy situation involving a gay couple and a surrogate mother who refused to sign over custody of the child she’d carried for the two men.
Here’s the backstory: Gordon Lake and his husband Manuel Santos arranged for a surrogate mother to carry their daughter, who was born a little over a year ago. They went to Thailand for the surrogacy, they say, because of the superior medical facilities available there. (Which is a little odd, since the couple is American and Spanish and there seem to be pretty good facilities in those countries, but okay.)
Related: Gay Couple Forced Into Hiding After Surrogate Threatens To Kidnap Their Child
The egg came from an anonymous donor, and the sperm was from one of the men. The surrogate was biologically unrelated to the baby, and says that she only found out that the couple was gay after she gave birth. At that point, she refused to sign the paperwork to allow the newborn to leave the country. The couple already had the baby with them at the time, but the surrogate started to demanding that they return them to her.
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
In fact, she said she wanted the baby to go to an “ordinary family” or a “legitimate married couple.” So that’s pretty unpleasant.
But now a court has upheld Gordon and Manuel’s custody of the baby, clearing a path for them to return home with her. It’s nice that they’ll be able to put the fight behind them, and lovely for that the court recognized their paternity despite marriage equality not being legalized (yet) in Thailand.
Since the baby was conceived, surrogacy has been banned in Thailand, so it’s unlikely that a case exactly like this will come up again soon. Still, a ruling that two fathers can bring their child home should be a comfort to same-sex parents everywhere.
Related: Gay Men With Baby Fever Share Their Struggles To Become Daddies
Ksb1978
Superior medical facilities my ass. More like the cheapness and rapidness at which you get your baby without the long waits and bureaucracy in the American system. That’s why surrogacy is booming business in India as well. Of course you wait nine months, but you get my drift.
SonOfKings
This smells like privileged White, Gay men determined to buy themselves a baby because they can afford the costs. I don’t support these kinds of arrangements. It’s too much like merchandising. If you want to be parents, either adopt or find an understanding Lesbian to help out.
uktnla
there’s more to it than the story explains. Isn’t the surrogate also from Thailand? That makes a big difference. She was probably cheaper than an American surrogate. Stupid to go all the way there to have the kid to save money — which, as it turns out, it didn’t.
Masc Pride
I agree with all of the above comments. Glad I didn’t have to go through this type of thing. So much easier to have kids the natural way.
muscl954
Regardless of the reasons for going to Thailand, the baby was NOT the biological child of the surrogate. It was the biological child of one of the gay men. The surrogate had no legal claim to that child and she had no legal right to prevent it from leaving with it’s father.
stranded
It’s hard to feel sympathetic in a story involving outsourcing surrogacy to the third world. It feels morally wrong to take advantage of these women. But muscl954 does have a point, despite some laws that say the “birth mother” has rights to the child even though they’re not biologically related is wrong. You sold you’re womb, i get they feel connected, but sorry, they don’t have a say.
Ksb1978
@muscl954: No one is saying it’s not their kid and they have no right to her. No one in the commenys said otherwise( its important to read,hon) The surrogate had NO right. What everyone is commenting on is their rationale for choosing Thailand as a place with superior medical facilities to do their surrogacy there when we know the real reason.